.SH
0.1.2 - Plan 9 is not a product
.R
.ihtml h3
.html ul

.DS
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!bellcore!faline!thumper!ulysses!smb
From: s...@ulysses.homer.nj.att.com (Steven Bellovin)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.wizards
Subject: Re: Plan 9? (+ others)
Message-ID: <10533@ulysses.homer.nj.att.com>
Date: 23 Aug 88 16:19:40 GMT
References: <846@yunexus.UUCP> <282@umbio.MIAMI.EDU> <848@yunexus.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill
Lines: 33
``Plan 9'' is not a product, and is not intended to be. It is research --
an experimental investigation into a different way of computing. The
developers started from several basic assumptions: that CPUs are very
cheap but that we don't really know how to combine them effectively; that
*good* networking is very important; that an intelligent user interface
(complete with dot-mapped display and mouse) is a Right Decision; that
existing systems with networks, mice, etc., are not the correct way to
do things, and in particular that today's workstations are not the way to
go. (No, I won't bother to explain all their reasoning; that's a long
and separate article.) Finally, the UNIX system per se is dead as a
vehicle for serious research into operating system structure; it has grown
too large, and is too constrained by 15+ years of history.
Now -- given those assumptions, they decided to throw away what we have
today and design a new system. Compatibility isn't an issue -- they are
not in the product-building business. (Nor are they in the ``let's make
another clever hack'' business.) Of course aspects of Plan 9 resemble
the UNIX system quite strongly -- is it any surprise that Pike, Thompson,
et al., think that that's a decent model to follow? But Plan 9 isn't,
and is not meant to be, a re-implementation of the UNIX system. If you
want, call it a UNIX-like system.
Will Plan 9 ever be released? I have no idea. Will it remain buried?
I hope not. Large companies do not sponsor large research organizations
just for the prestige; they hope for an (eventual) concrete return in the
form of concepts that can be made into (or incorporated into) products.
--Steve Bellovin
Disclaimer: this article is not, of course, an official statement from AT&T.
Nor is it an official statement of the reasoning behind Plan 9. I do think
it's accurate, though, and I'm sure I'll be told if I'm wrong...
.DE
.html ul
.html -
.ihtml h3

.SH
0.1.3 - Plan 9 is not for you
.R
.ihtml h3
.B
Let's be perfectly honest.
.R
Many features that today's "computer experts" consider to be essential to computing (javascript, CSS, HTML5, etc.) either did not exist when Plan 9 was abandoned, or were purposely left out of the operating system. You might find this to be an unacceptable obstacle to adopting Plan 9 into your daily workflow. If you cannot imagine a use for a computer that does not involve a web browser, Plan 9 may not be for you.
See:
.ihtml a
http://harmful.cat-v.org/software/
.ihtml a
.html -
.ihtml h2

.SH
0.2 - Why Plan 9?
.R
.ihtml h2
You may ask yourself, well, how did I get here? In the words of Plan 9 contributor
.ihtml a
Russ Cox:
.ihtml a
.html ul

.SH
0.2.3 - Why did Plan 9's creators give up on Plan 9?
.R
.ihtml h3
.html -
.FG belllabs jpg
All of the people who worked on Plan 9 have moved on from Bell Labs and/or
no longer work on Plan 9. Various reasons have been articulated by various people.
.ihtml a
Russ Cox:
.ihtml a
.html ul